123 replies to this topic

[Lukas]

I'd suggest allocating different people to testing different parts of the game. You could have a group that tests just Course Forge, and other groups that test different areas of Perfect Golf (physics, GUI, etc.). I think this would ensure that all parts of the game get enough attention. It would also make it easier to collate the information and figure out what areas need improvement/fixing.

 

I'm definitely interested in helping out, particularly on the Course Forge side of things, but also Perfect Golf. I've already created a few terrains in Unity based on courses I've played. I think I must be one of the youngest members (if not the youngest) here on the forum (19 y/o), so it might be of interest to get a different perspective on the game. I'm studying mechanical engineering and play off a +2 handicap so I also am very familiar with the game of golf at a high level, as well as the physical reactions of a well struck ball.

I have a bit of spare time to dedicate to PG and CF (off uni until March). I'm a mac user as well if that makes any difference.

[Perculator]

Been an avid Links player since 1997. Would be happy to be a part of the game play beta team. I could be especially helpful for the "off piste" parts of the course regarding lies and playability from the lesser visited areas of the courses. Yes, I am wild off the tee. Whatever you decide I am excited to see the beta on the near horizon.

I am on Windows 8.1 by the way, if that makes any difference.

[Cactus]

This is all exciting. I can help a few hours a night and weekends. Vacation is coming up also and would be able to sink a few days into then also. Good luck and thanks for the news!

[Tigers Agent]

I'm not a course builder. I'd be willing to only test the play of the game.

[Jimbobh]

I would also like to test out the simulator side of things. Our local course runs an indoor league which started last week, and it would be a good chance to get a lot of input from the players at different levels. They do however use the "Scramble" format because it is faster play, but I don't know if PP is designed with the "Scramble" format. Their current system they are using, seems to have a lot of bugs in it and the graphics aren't all that good either. I have been watching and waiting for PP for over a year and would like to be a part of it's testing and development.

[TeenZ]

I am busy with my son and work but I would be very good at providing ideas from general play (having played 10,000 games on another golf game before I realised it was not worth continuing) as well as testing the CF and providing some ideas. Just depends how much spare time I have but I would appreciate being included, thanx.

[Ron Piskorik]

I am retired and have plenty of time test.  I would like to be included in the alpha testing of game as early as possible.

I have been playing computer golf since the mid 1980's ( Hi-Res Golf on an Apple II) and have beta tested TW since TW2003.  I have also been managing handicap and scratch tours for groups in TW since about 2004. I play mouse swing only and prefer a horizontal swing option.  I am most interested in testing the the game at the simulation difficulty for realistic difficulty and ball physics.

I would like to test the course forge at a later stage of development.  The reason is that I have tried designing with JN6 and TW course architects and found them too difficult for me to build a course that I thought was good enough to release to the community.  I really don't think I would be much help in the early stages but I think I could be of help when it is close to release.  I could give  feedback on how a new designer feels about the ease of use and areas that are difficult or confusing to them.

Ron 

[HalkeFralg]

I'd suggest small groups assigned to test to individual aspects(Group 1-Game, Group 2-Course Forge etc). That being said, I'd be happy to help test whatever you need help with.

[Chaz1957]

             I agree with a couple of other members that the groups should be smaller so that the development team is not  overwhelmed       with  feedback.

            I agree with axe that when we were beta testing TWO ,It turned out to be a big fiasco..

            As for the pay side for testing,I think that the true testers will not have a problem with that,and maybe discounted at full release.

           I'm also interested in testing of the game itself,the swing meter interests me as does the ball flight and physics.

           I'm running win 7  with high end graphics.

[golfcart03]

I'd like to be in on testing the Game itself, no terrain importer or CF.. I would suggest a separate forum when this get's going, not a public one.

 

Also, have sections:

General Forum

Swing Mechanics

Ball physics

Textures

Etc.etc.

 

Maybe a small group of say 50 at the most? The challenge will be to keep those that just want to play, from the testing. As what happened in the TWO beta testing, many many players never helped at all.. This was very discouraging..

 

Thanks

Hi  Everyone:

 

I agree with Axe.  The game should be tested by players that actually want to test and not just play the game.  The Course Forge and Terrain Importer should be tested by those that are actually experienced course designers.

 

As stated before, I tested for custom designed courses for the TW series for seven years; And, I E-mailed every designer a complete test report for every beta that I tested for each of them.   I was also one of the testers for the TWO game since the second beta, (I wish I had gotten involved in testing that game when the testing began,) and I also E-mailed the developers of the TWO  Online game complete test reports of each of the betas that I tested.

 

(The TWO Online game had the potential of being one of the best Online Golf Games ever developed if EA had listened to the beta testers and utilized the feedback they received from the testers.)

 

As a tester for the Perfect Golf betas, I will E-mail the developers a complete test report, (including screenshots of possible areas of improvement,if possible,) for each beta that I test of Perfect Golf.

 

As testers, we well be devoting many, many hours to testing all of the different aspects of the game and will spend at least several  additional hours compiling the test results and writing the test reports.  As such, I feel that the testers shound have access to the betas at no charge as long as they provide Perfect Parallel with the results of they're tests.

 

Thanks and make it a super day.

[mjhamilton113]

I would enjoy being apart of the testing process especially the course forge

[AlanR54NC]

Nothing new: Large open base = easy to implement, but likely lot of non-feedback

Small focused group is likely to provide more and better feedback. This would likely require more work on PP part due to overhead of selecting a good set of candidates, not unlike interviewing for a new developer, analyst position.

agree that a paid access route might weed out some of the "just curious" volunteers. I would also think most of the Kickstarter backers would buy into this approach.

Making sure you get a mix of course designers vs players is critical. I've dabbled with apcd but most of the details on course design is WAY over my head and I would miss any nuances in a courseforge evaluation. However, from a player/user interface perspective I think I would do well

[Acrilix]

Too many cooks spoil the broth.

[Stephen Sullivan]

I would say small and select, even though I myself would love to play it and use Course Forge.

[Brucey Mc]

I thought that all those who signed up for the kickstarter scheme (remember that?) were all going to be invited to beta test? Having said that I am prepared to pay to beta test Course Forge.

[fungolfer]

I'd prefer limited group of players and designers. I for myself would prefer playing golf. Designing is an option for future.

I like the idea of paying for alpha and get a discount on the final. I hope PG will have a reporting tool in it, but I have no problem to write reports by mail.

Keep on the great work guys, I know you will make alot of ppl. very happy

[Mick-S]

I thought that all those who signed up for the kickstarter scheme (remember that?) were all going to be invited to beta test? Having said that I am prepared to pay to beta test Course Forge.

Ah yes forgot about that, do we know how many signed up for kickstarter

[Davefevs]

Ah yes forgot about that, do we know how many signed up for kickstarter

Wonder whether that promise only counted if Kickstarter was successful??

Having said that, it would seem fair....assume PP have access to the data for those who signed up?

[FixAmer1st]

I have played Links ever since it's initial release and I have Beta tested it since Links 1998. I have also help test the patches by the apcd guys and the three patches that Mark Hulka released.

 

HOWEVER, my primary interest in a golf game is the Computer players and that is what I tested for the Access/MS guys. Not hearing much about AI players in the threads here I do not know if they have been programmed yet?

 

Anyway, AI's to test or not, I would love to help Beta test the PP game. I run a WinXP machine and could test how well the game runs on an older Windows version machine.

 

As for the Course Forge program, I do have a course I want to build but that can wait until the release of the FULL set of programs.

 

Jerry

[Dazmaniac]

IIRC, I think Bruce was right.

 

When the plug was decided to be pulled on the Kickstarter not long after Andrew sent out an email explaining that the funding had not been reached and whilst it was a setback the project would still go ahead, but with PP looking at other avenues of raising funds.

 

The email (which I believe was only sent to those who had pledged) also invited them to reply and in return be added to a list of potential BETA testers, as at the time it seemed the Course Forge would be made available to play with around March/April, but we all know the trials and tribs since then. So the plan was to offer those that pledged a sort of closed BETA, but as I'm sure we are all aware this never came to be, but it seems now the wheels are in motion to get something out to the community, only they need to decide how best to do it.

 

So, it would seem to me that the Kickstarter pledge list is a thing of the past.